Tom,
It is very difficult to take political outlooks from the 19th century and require that they be applied in the 21st context.
Certainly we owe a great debt of gratitude to Acton for his observation: "power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely," and it is something that we ought to keep in the forefront in our current political context.
“Striking the right balance between ideals, expectations and consensus is an essential test of leadership” is a serious consideration. However, by using the phrase ‘right balance’ Acton, himself, ties the ‘balancing’ exercise into its context. We cannot take Acton’s context and use it to come to the right conclusions about that exactly that balance should be today.
Also, it is suggested that Dion erred precisely in not striking the right balance by not properly taking into account the current context in his political outlook. As an activist, or the leader of an NGO, Dion’s approach may have been the right approach. But, as the leader of a major party in a modern, free, democratic, diverse, tolerant and economy based first world country, and a Liberal party at that, he failed to even to engage in ‘striking the right balance’ and he certainly did not balance ideals with consensus, or expectations for that matter. The Liberal Party of Canada is not a NGO and does not have an agenda to promote to the exclusion of all other factors.
Studied consideration of all the important factors to come up with a solution that is for the good of all and not one small sector is the name of the game, especially for Liberals:
“to build a nation where everyone can attain their potential and join together to help those that need help and protect those that need protection; through: informed, open and transparent discussion leading to a truly democratic solution for the good of all (Lloyd MacIlquham)” .
It seems to me that Ignatieff is taking the requisite time and effort ot ensure that the “right balance” is struck – Rock on Iggie.